Case Law[2024] ZAGPJHC 328South Africa
Body Corporate of Bridgetown v Gauteng Management Agents (2024/028185) [2024] ZAGPJHC 328 (30 March 2024)
High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)
30 March 2024
Headnotes
Summary
Judgment
begin wrapper
begin container
begin header
begin slogan-floater
end slogan-floater
- About SAFLII
About SAFLII
- Databases
Databases
- Search
Search
- Terms of Use
Terms of Use
- RSS Feeds
RSS Feeds
end header
begin main
begin center
# South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
You are here:
SAFLII
>>
Databases
>>
South Africa: South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg
>>
2024
>>
[2024] ZAGPJHC 328
|
Noteup
|
LawCite
sino index
## Body Corporate of Bridgetown v Gauteng Management Agents (2024/028185) [2024] ZAGPJHC 328 (30 March 2024)
Body Corporate of Bridgetown v Gauteng Management Agents (2024/028185) [2024] ZAGPJHC 328 (30 March 2024)
Download original files
PDF format
RTF format
make_database: source=/home/saflii//raw/ZAGPJHC/Data/2024_328.html
sino date 30 March 2024
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
GAUTENG
DIVISION, JOHANNESBURG
CASE
NO: 2024 – 028185
1.REPORTABLE:
NO
2.OF
INTEREST TO OTHER JUDGES: NO
In
the application by
THE BODY CORPORATE OF
BRIDGETOWN (SCHEME Applicant
NOS SS 1142/1143, 1144
OF 1995 AND 177 OF 1996)
and
GAUTENG MANAGEMENT
AGENTS Respondent
JUDGMENT
MOORCROFT
AJ:
Summary
Application by body
corporate – trustees are not in good standing and therefore
disqualified by rules of body corporate from
holding office –
resolution to cancel agreement with managing agent of no effect –
application dismissed
Order
[1]
In this matter I make the following order:
1.
The application is dismissed;
2.
The applicant is ordered to pay the costs of
the application.
[2]
The reasons for the order follow below.
Introduction
[3]
This is an application in the urgent court by the
applicant, a body corporate established in terms of the
Sectional
Titles Act 95 of 1986
read with the provisions of the Sectional
Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011 for the Bridgetown scheme and
residential complex
established in 1995. There are 524 units in the
complex and the owners of units are members of the applicant.
The
respondent is the managing agent of the applicant and the applicant
alleges that the management agreement between the parties
expired on
29 February 2024. The respondent however refused to hand over the
relevant documentation and information under its control
including
information relating to the bank account of the applicant.
The
application is supported by a resolution of the trustees purportedly
in office taken on 16 February 2024.
[4]
The case for the applicant is that this was a
valid cancellation of the management agreement. The respondent
disputes the alleged
cancellation and a number of grounds. It is not
necessary to deal fully with his grounds as the application falls to
be decided
on clause 22.4 of the conduct rules of the applicant
referred to in paragraph 15.2 of the answering affidavit. In terms of
the
rule:
“
No
trustee may hold office should his or her levies and electricity fall
into arrears.”
[5]
The respondent presents cogent evidence to the
effect that the trustees are in arrears with payment of levies due by
them. The applicant
does not take issue with this evidence in the
replying affidavit and merely puts the respondent to the proof of the
allegations.
[6]
On the papers therefore the trustees are not
authorised to act because they may not hold office for the reasons
set out above. The
application must therefore fail.
[7]
Because the application was brought in the Urgent
Court it will furnished to the parties immediately but the date of
publication
will be deemed to be 2 April 2024.
MOORCROFT
AJ
ACTING
JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA
GAUTENG
DIVISION
JOHANNESBURG
Electronically
submitted
Delivered:
This judgement was prepared and authored by the Acting Judge whose
name is reflected and is handed down electronically
by circulation to
the Parties / their legal representatives by email and by uploading
it to the electronic file of this matter
on CaseLines. The date of
the judgment is deemed to be
2 APRIL 2024
COUNSEL
FOR THE APPLICANT: K
NDUNGU
INSTRUCTED
BY:
NDUNGU ATTORNEYS
COUNSEL
FOR THE RESPONDENT: JH GROENEWALD
INSTRUCTED
BY:
VMA INC
DATE
OF ARGUMENT:
27 MARCH 2024
DATE
OF JUDGMENT:
30 MARCH 2024
sino noindex
make_database footer start
Similar Cases
Body Corporate Sandton View v Mathews and Others (2021/50854) [2024] ZAGPJHC 786 (19 July 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 786High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Body Corporate of Balboa Park v Skeyi and Another (2023-061020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 361 (12 April 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 361High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Body Corporate of Argyle Green v Appeal Authority City of Johannesburg and Others (2021/9113) [2024] ZAGPJHC 943 (16 September 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 943High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Body Corporate of LOS Alamos Norte v Sebola And Others (30469/2020) [2024] ZAGPJHC 737 (12 August 2024)
[2024] ZAGPJHC 737High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar
Body Corporate of Central Square v Beck-Paxton N.O and Others (A2023/126436) [2025] ZAGPJHC 719 (28 March 2025)
[2025] ZAGPJHC 719High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg)100% similar